Why do people prefer BSD over GNU/Linux?

Why do people prefer BSD over GNU/Linux?

Other urls found in this thread:

embeddedarm.com/blog/netbsd-toaster-powered-by-the-ts-7200-arm9-sbc/
brendangregg.com/Specials/maybe_example.txt
brendangregg.com/Specials/maybe
git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/coreutils.git/tree/src/true.c
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

For personal and/or technical reasons.

the kernel and its tooling are better and the community is tighter but userspace wise linux has no nix competitors

For a Windows Replacement would you Recommend GNU/Linux or BSD? also which version of BSD is the best?

>Windows Replacement

get Kubuntu, KDE is designed to emulate windows functionality and comes with office clone apps buillt in, any BSD distribution you get isn't going to be user-friendly for a new nix user even an intermediate user

>For a Windows Replacement would you Recommend GNU/Linux or BSD?
You'll have an easier time of things in the Linux world. You want Linux unless you already know why you don't wan't Linux.

>also which version of BSD is the best?

>I just want the easiest/best-over-all thing that isn't Linux
FreeBSD

>I'm very, very concerned about security, or the machine is going to be a router/firewall
OpenBSD

>I want to install it on a 20-year-old toaster
NetBSD

Not sure why 2bh; I think for better system cohesiveness or something

/thread

Because i can read all of the man pages in the initial installation in 1/16th the time it takes to figure out gentoo.

Are you serious? Linux is hundreds of times more popular.

I can't stop laughing at this image

Recommending OpenBSD for a firewall is okay if it's a home firewall, but a little bit irresponsible to recommend it for a firewall/router that needs higher throughput since it has no SMP in that area. pf is giant locked and OpenBSD starves high NICs of buffers to strain the kernel less

HolyC is the official programming language of Bogdanograd

Nobody said otherwise.

>I want to install it on a 20-year-old toaster
>NetBSD

reminder:
embeddedarm.com/blog/netbsd-toaster-powered-by-the-ts-7200-arm9-sbc/

less gnu cancer

>gnu cancer

the real cancer is the dumb GNU hatred.

Simply to stay away from the communist virus that is GPL.

GNU is pretty cancerous though, have you seen what their code looks like? It's overly complicated, incompatible with things like CFI, and just overall full of loopholes.

no poetteringware
no red hat cuckoldry

systemd

Most don't. Some do. OP is a faggot anyway.

So you're saying you'd shoot yourself in the face if it was popular?

GPLv3, and GNU by association, is literally described as a viral license - a description which matches cancer pretty well functionality-wise, because it also spreads to everything else it touches.

>t. brainlet
If you have an internet conncection and an IQ above 95 there's no reason why you shouldn't understand gentoo

That personal reason? Terminal gay autism.

Because BSD's are cohesive systems rather than hack together UNIX rip offs like Linux distros.

Additionally, the BSD community is vastly more engineering and developer orientated contrast to the Linux community which is full of social justice warfare and autistic elitism.

Basically, BSD is the adult neurotypical choice.

same

Because GNU is annoying. Every time BSD is installed, Richard Stallman cries. Ha!

Why do people prefer real women over fags with wigs?

Autism.

Special snowflake syndrome.

> >I want to install it on a 20-year-old toaster
> NetBSD
Linux supports more platforms than NetBSD tho, and not some outdated shit like sun workstations NetBSD still works on.

>want to install it on a 20 year old toaster
>use Linux, it supports more stuff and has the added benefit that it doesn't support 20 year old toasters
You're dumb.

i don't know man i think openbsd is easier since it comes with an actual desktop environment (well desktop environment is debatable but it has a window manager)

>GNU
>Gigantic, Nasty but Unavoidable

>It's overly complicated
Buffers are complicated? Bash is complicated, but still comfy.

BSD is full of crappy legacy code. If that's """cohesive""" for you.

>more engineering and developer orientated contrast to the Linux community
Randi Harper can't survive a second in lkml (or OpenBSD's mail list), but on a shitfest like freebsd, she got the chance to bully devs and infect with her shitty ideas the project. OpenBSD have its serious problems, but do enough good and important for free software to get some money from linux foundation too. On other hand freebsd is nothing but stolen opensolaris code and some inbred ideas.

The Switch also don't run freebsd, just the networking stack, but it's good for imaginary victories for the biggest losers of the os development.

My reason is that the BSDs in general, and FreeBSD in particular, hasn't changed since 2001 when I started using it: It has better documentation - both when it comes to official documentation (the handbooks, manpages, and so forth, as they're part of the release process), but also in terms of published literature and papers in ACME and USENIX, among many others.

That's because it ships with an (outdated) version of X.

Fucking lol.

Nice bait.

>My reason is that the BSDs in general, and FreeBSD in particular, hasn't changed since 2001 when I started using it: It has better documentation
My reason is the same as it was in 2001 when I started using FreeBSD: The BSDs, FreeBSD in particular, has better documentation.

>hasn't changed since 2001
So it's an outdated crap.
> It has better documentation
Better in what? There is a shitton of books about linux kernel and userspace.

BSD is crap. Stop shilling garbage.

>That's because it ships with an (outdated) version of X.
yeah but at least it works and i don't need to fucking install GNU utils to compile it

>Implying people like BSD over Linux

>patched gcc in the base install
BSD development isn't about GNU hate.

oh FUCK
What are they up too?

Notice the correction I made in If there's one thing I hate more than GPL-/GNU-tards, it's people who use BSD licensed software out of choice and still think it's about license superiority.

GCC, or any GPL software, very soon won't be in the FreeBSD base system, but that's simply because it's easier to avoid GPL in base - there's still plenty of it in ports, where it should be.

no but i'd rather not have two make executable on my systems just to build Xorg

>If there's one thing I hate more than GPL-/GNU-tards, it's people who use BSD licensed software out of choice and still think it's about license superiority.
Self hating or just a BSD shil?

Your "problem".

Take a look at GNU yes or GNU ls. Somehow it manages to be more complicated than every other implementation out there because it "optimizes for performance". I don't remember the last time I needed performance optimizations on `yes` or `ls`. Additionally, in doing do it also breaks some of the core security mechanisms such as CFI, which says enough about code quality. Also, `su` doesn't support the wheel group, making configuration a nightmare, because RMS thought that it goes against his ideals, let that sink in. Let's not even start on the dogshit that is gcc aswell.

No, I actually just appreciate the BSD license for what it is: ie. an attempt to try and not get the developers sued, the reason for which should be pretty obvious if you know your computing history.
I'm tired of kids who don't do any hacking themselves proclaiming one opensource license or philosophy better than another.

>GNU yes
Clearly you need brendangregg.com/Specials/maybe_example.txt

Passwords are also against RMS' ideals, by his own words, because he's often told the story of how, back when he did actual hacking, he convinced everyone to share passwords for the timeshared mainframe.

If I had to live around you, sure.

Meant to link brendangregg.com/Specials/maybe instead

That's very sweet of you, thank you. That way you both remove yourself from the gene-pool, and we don't have to put up with your bullshit.

is a virgin basement dweller whose relationship to the gene-pool is merely as a product, not a contributing factor.

I have already removed myself from the genepool when I started to use gnu/linux.

>using BSD
get sued by ATT
>using Apache to protect yourself against patent trolls
Still sued by patent trolls.
Literal snake oil.

git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/coreutils.git/tree/src/true.c
Does this answer your question?

There's a difference between the Berkeley System Distribution which pre-dates Linux and MINIX (and through which NetBSD, FreeBSD and all their derivatives directly trace their source-code to ~1976 through identifiable files, and June 30th, 1970 if you consider Research Unix as a whole) and the BSD license which post-dates the AT&T v. BSDi/State of California lawsuit.
Using the BSD license will not get you sued, and the reasons why BSDi was sued are more complex than just the fact that it contained Unix code - For one thing, they owned and advertised selling UNIX through 1-800-ITS-UNIX and them selling BSD as a version of UNIX which AT&T at that time made money on.
Besides, why do you think AT&T settled out of court against BSDi and State of California? They knew they couldn't win, and in the end the BSD code was still made available for free, and NetBSD, then FreeBSD were released.

WHY is Sup Forums so full of retards who think they know anything?

>>also which version of BSD is the best?
>>I just want the easiest/best-over-all thing that isn't Linux
>FreeBSD
>>I'm very, very concerned about security, or the machine is going to be a router/firewall
>OpenBSD
>>I want to install it on a 20-year-old toaster
>NetBSD

>I'm gay and just want to use BSD like an aplel user
FreeBSD

>I'm gay, use a laptop and think Theo is very manly.
OpenBSD

>I'm just a total faggot and japanese.
NetBSD

Chalet OS - Xubuntu with Windows theme and some helpful functions for newbies